John's 2nd Attempt At Pontification

TO: WOLF@CNN.COM
FROM: JOHNSNOTES

RE: BETTER DEBATE QUESTIONS

Since your staff seemed to have problems drafting and/or selecting interesting and relevant debate questions, I decided to sit down and give myself 30 minutes to draft some.  (I cheated in that I had internet access.)  Included at the end is a “gotcha” question for each candidate since I know you may be into them.  Santorum’s is a bit lame because the whole home schooling thing is just borrr-ing.

  • To any/all candidates: this week, economists noted that the recession in the UK was now threatening to outspan the Great Depression there.  The measures taken by the current government were well publicized and somewhat controversial - how, if at all, does the U.K.’s experience influence what policies you would advocate upon taking office? 
  • Staying in Europe and without reference to anything which could or should be done in the US, is there any specific action which you believe that the European Central Bank should be taking to stem the eurozone crisis?
  • Moving to North Korea, is the current Obama administration policy towards North Korea sufficient?  If no, or if you were about to say “they have no policy” - summarize what yours would be today.
  • Do you believe higher education costs too much?  If so, apart from general improvements to the U.S. economy writ large, what - if anything - would you advocate doing to make college more affordable?
  • Do you believe that the filibuster rule in the U.S. Senate should be limited in any way or done away with in total?
  • Do you believe that the so-called “reconciliation rules” in the Senate for budget-related measures should be limited in any way?
  • Apart from general improvements in the economy overall, do you believe that the government has a role to play in helping homeowners avert foreclosure or should the market be allowed to work its way through foreclosures with no new government interventions or programs?
  • If you agree to make measures suggested by Rep. Paul concerning transparency in the Federal Reserves a litmus test for any Fed Chairman you nominate?
  • Should there be any limits, apart from the impeachable offenses specified in the Constitution, upon the federal judiciary?
  • Do you believe that Social Security benefits should be means-tested?
  • Hollywood has been very open in supporting the SOPA Act as it’s been working it’s way through Congress.  The White House has indicated that it’s not satisfied with some of its provisions.  Do you support SOPA in its current form?
  • Under what circumstances would you envision asking the Congress to declare war?
  • Governor Romney - did you pay any federal income taxes in 2009? OR Do you place any conditions on the investments made in blind trust by your trustee?
  • Speaker Gingrich - do you believe that there is a legitimate continuing role for the mortgage GSE’s in today’s economy?  If not, when did you reach that conclusion?
  • Representative Paul - your secretary is reported in the Wall Street Journal as saying that you actively reviewed and signed off on the controversial newsletters from your office in the 1980s.  I understand that you may contest that account and you should feel free to do so here if you wish - but in any event - do you reject their content?  [Follow up if necessary] And if you haven’t reviewed them, why haven’t you done so by now?
  • Senator Santorum - you have said that you wish that the Congress had funded the Medicare Part D benefit when it was passed.  How would you have proposed to pay for that benefit? 

Granted - these questions might strike some as wonky (reconcilation for instance).  But, these are the issues where it would help to get candidates on the record because, frankly, they end up mattering later.  Maybe some centrists would have liked to know that President Obama was cool with reconciliation.   Same with President Bush and tax cuts.  It was a method used to pass HUGE pieces of legislation over the past 10-odd years.  Never discussed.

Posted at 2:03pm and tagged with: one column,.

To those who thought that the President’s speech last night was insufficiently centrist or insufficiently compromising?  Get over it.  The campaign has begun.  Governing is over.  Congress will pass the payroll tax extension and not much else.  The debt ceiling and Bush tax cut debates will occur in the lame duck Congress and be largely dictated by the results of the Presidential election.  That’s the reality of 20th and 21st Century government.  Only a new mandate for our current or new President will result in him getting anything accomplished in 2013 and 2014.   (Just like his mandate in 2008 was what allowed him to get stuff done in 2009 and 2010.)  There is nothing new about this. 

The President is being politically rational.  The only chance he has to get his agenda - or an agenda which even closely resembles his - passed is to get re-elected.  The time for governing is over.  The time to win an election has begun.

Posted at 6:02pm.

laphamsquarterly:

Shut UP, history! You are so crazy!

mentalflossr:

Born in 1790, John Tyler was our 10th President. He took office in 1841 after William Henry Harrison died.

Posted at 4:53pm.

AKA a book lover’s dream of the afterlife…

(Source: lady-lover)

Posted at 9:10am.

AKA a book lover’s dream of the afterlife…

I think Josh Marshall is right, Mitt Romney will eventually be the GOP nominee. He has the money, he has the organization.  He will be on the ballot in every state (Newt will not.)  But, there is going to be some pain along the way.  Nights like last night left me with the following conclusion - Romney has got to get the point where he can start skipping these debates. And he needs to do so soon. Last night, he had a couple of lines which could be fodder for fall attack ads.  The first, and my personal favorite, was his line that he was from “the real streets of America.”  Which is just ludicrous.  Romney says that he didn’t keep any of his inheritance from his father but he doesn’t say how much support he received from his parents while they lived.  (And he was fortunate in many respects beyond financial ones that they were lucky to have lived quite a long time.)  In contrast to an opponent who actually grew up in a family of moderate means, he sounds silly.  Romney also melted down when discussing his tax returns.  (Marshall links to that in his post.)

Romney has to cut down on the unforced errors.  And the only way he accomplishes that is by getting out of these debates.  To those who would argue that the long primary helped improve President Obama’s skills?  Not quite comparable.  Obama’s most memorable gaffe was probably the “you’re likable enough” line to Hillary Clinton.  That hurt him in the primary but wasn’t an issue in the general.  His repeated insistence to directly negotiate with Iran “without preconditions” wasn’t used to much effect by John McCain because: (a) Obama’s base agreed with him, and (b) swing voters weren’t swayed by foreign policy concerns.  In a different election, Obama might have wanted to avoid that discussion.  (I hesitate to call it a gaffe because I think Obama genuinely agreed with that position and felt he could turn it into a strength.)  Governor Romney clearly does not like to be challenged - at one point last night he alluded to not “not standing for that on this stage” when he was attacked by Rick Santorum.  He needs to win some races and escape debates while practicing for the fall.  He also needs to cease press avails and stop taking unscreened audience questions.  You know, like what usually happens in a general election.  And soon.  A boring race is a Romney race.  An unstructured race, which is what this one is right now, just pokes holes in Romney’s viability.  And may just end up sending him back to the streets come November.

Posted at 6:01pm.

They have a version of this in Cooperstown (using little colored baseballs) and I always was amazed by it when I’d visit (which was often - Cooperstown was just too close to I-88 to not stop on the way home from school).

chitwoodandhobbs:

Get A Good Ball To Hit

One of the greatest hitters in the history of baseball, Ted Williams. Hitting a baseball is largely considered to be the most difficult thing to do in all of sports and Ted Williams could do it better than nearly every one. That’s a one-line resume. No further explanation necessary.

Ted Williams was a naturally gifted athlete with sharp eyesight and quick reflexes. Perhaps the same skills that lent to becoming a top-notch fighter pilot in WWII. What gave Williams the edge was his scientific, systematic approach to hitting.

The now famous Ted Williams strike zone first appeared in Sports Illustrated in 1968, Science Of Batting. In this article he broke down the strike zone into 77 baseballs. The average on each of ball is not what Williams actually hit but rather his projected average — that’s key. Ted Williams doesn’t pretend that he can hit every pitch. Balls low and outside he knows he should lay off, the odds are against him. But right in the center of the plate, that’s his “happy zone”. “The heart of the plate, belt-high, and with some sugar on it.”

Maybe it was Williams’ shear willpower that allowed him to hit .400. He had the self control to wait for his pitch. And then wait some more.

I remember Lefty Chase, who pitched for Washington. He had a hell of a curve and fastball, but he was wild. One day he got me to 3 and 2 with two men on, and threw a big sharp curve, and I took it. Fooled me. Strike three. I got up again in the fourth inning, bases loaded, count goes to 3 and 2, and here comes another, and I’m hanging in there, waiting, waiting, and I don’t think I moved until the ball was right by my ear. It darn near hit my hat and spun it on my head. I walked.

@chitwoodhobbs

Posted at 12:33pm.

They have a version of this in Cooperstown (using little colored baseballs) and I always was amazed by it when I’d visit (which was often - Cooperstown was just too close to I-88 to not stop on the way home from school).
chitwoodandhobbs:

Get A Good Ball To Hit
One of the greatest hitters in the history of baseball, Ted Williams. Hitting a baseball is largely considered to be the most difficult thing to do in all of sports and Ted Williams could do it better than nearly every one. That’s a one-line resume. No further explanation necessary.
Ted Williams was a naturally gifted athlete with sharp eyesight and quick reflexes. Perhaps the same skills that lent to becoming a top-notch fighter pilot in WWII. What gave Williams the edge was his scientific, systematic approach to hitting.
The now famous Ted Williams strike zone first appeared in Sports Illustrated in 1968, Science Of Batting. In this article he broke down the strike zone into 77 baseballs. The average on each of ball is not what Williams actually hit but rather his projected average — that’s key. Ted Williams doesn’t pretend that he can hit every pitch. Balls low and outside he knows he should lay off, the odds are against him. But right in the center of the plate, that’s his “happy zone”. “The heart of the plate, belt-high, and with some sugar on it.”
Maybe it was Williams’ shear willpower that allowed him to hit .400. He had the self control to wait for his pitch. And then wait some more.

I remember Lefty Chase, who pitched for Washington. He had a hell of a curve and fastball, but he was wild. One day he got me to 3 and 2 with two men on, and threw a big sharp curve, and I took it. Fooled me. Strike three. I got up again in the fourth inning, bases loaded, count goes to 3 and 2, and here comes another, and I’m hanging in there, waiting, waiting, and I don’t think I moved until the ball was right by my ear. It darn near hit my hat and spun it on my head. I walked.

@chitwoodhobbs

This Deadspin piece just eviscerates ESPN’s argument to ever be considered a legitimate journalistic organization.  Which might be an argument they aren’t that interested in making.  ESPN, after all, is an set of entertainment channels.  (It’s even in the name).  But, at times, they also try and lay claim to the mantle of sports journalism.  They have shows (Outside the Lines, Sports Reporters) which are dedicated to sports journalism.

The Deadspin piece is a timeline look at emails sent to Auburn’s Sports PR office during Cam Newton’s last year at Auburn.  The emails start off as fawning.  Unsurprising.  Requests for press passes, interviews, shots of Cam visiting local schools.  No problem.   Auburn keeps winning.  And, then, suddenly two different storms appear on the horizon - (1) the circumstances of Newton’s departure from Florida begin to leak, and (2) the details surrounding his post-Florida recruitment (i.e. $$$$ for Newton’s commitment to play) begin to leak.  After a few weeks of uncomfortable inquiries - and ESPN breaking one of the stories (story (2) above) - the winning continues and even ESPN backs off and resumes kid-glove treatment of Newton because, surprise, ABC/ESPN still has to televise Auburn-related events.

A compelling read if you have the time.

Posted at 6:02pm.

ESPN New York on why the 11-7 Giants (9-7 regular season) are the best (they say “most complete” but I’m not sure what that means or is meant to mean if not a synonym for “best”) team left of the remaining four NFL playoff teams.  Just for my information, who says this?  Who says that Eli is better than Tom Brady in any aspect of their games (other than, say, age)?  Eli had a very good season, Brady had a ridiculous season.

Posted at 6:00pm.

[Eli] Manning has had the sort of season that’s left people saying he, and not Brady, is now the most clutch quarterback in the league.

robertreich:

Mitt Romney is casting the 2012 campaign as “free enterprise on trial” – defining free enterprise as achieving success through “hard work and risking-taking.” Tea-Party favorite Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina says he’s supporting Romney because “we really need someone who understands how…

Posted at 4:44pm.

Robert Reich (look above).  Correctly pointing out that the “job creators” Mitt Romney is most familiar with face- relatively speaking - no risks whatsoever.

Posted at 4:44pm.

To the extent free enterprise is on trial, the real question is whether the system is rigged in favor of those at the top who get rewarded no matter how badly they screw up, while the rest of us get screwed no matter how hard we work.